Dangerousness of the delusional misidentification of children.

Misidentification syndromes have been studied from a variety of perspectives, including phenomenological, biological, and nosological approaches. More recently, misidentification syndromes have been studied from a psychiatric-legal perspective, especially with regards to the problem of dangerousness. Capgras syndrome and other syndromes of misidentification can lead to hostile mood and subsequent physical violence. Little attention has so far been devoted to children as the objects of the psychotic person's misidentification delusion(s). We provide a review of cases from the anglophonic literature that have children as the misidentified objects, add three new cases, and then discuss the relationship between misidentification and potential harm to these children.     

我国刑法应增设研发、生产、销售危害人体健康添加剂罪

"蛋白粉"、瘦肉精等危害人体健康的添加剂不属于食品,生产销售上述添加剂不能定性为生产销售有毒有害食品罪。研发、生产、销售危害人体健康的添加剂必须介入他人的有责行为才会发生危害社会结果,不宜定性为以危险方法危害公共安全罪。无相应合格产品存在或不属质量不合格的不能定性为生产销售伪劣产品罪。生产销售绝对不允许买卖产品不宜定性为非法经营罪,即使属于非法经营或生产销售伪劣产品也要达5万元以上才能入罪,无法规制会危害人体健康但数额未达5万元以上的行为。《刑法》规定的漏洞导致司法机关选择最相类似罪名定处有破坏罪刑法定原则的危险,故我国《刑法》应增设研发、生产、销售危害人体健康添加剂罪。     

也谈正确认识和认定刑法上的因果关系

认识刑法中的因果关系,应当先从行为的客观性质着手确定行为与结果有无因果关系,然后再结合行为人的主观罪过确定其行为是否属危害行为,进而确定其刑事责任的轻重;刑法中的因果关系是危害行为与危害结果之间的一种内在的、本质的联系,危害行为（即原因）的产生带有偶然性,刑法上因果关系本身是必然性和偶然性的辩证统一;应当正确区分因果关系中的原因与条件;不能把刑法上的因果关系与构成犯罪和承担刑事责任等同起来。     

When crime prevention harms: a review of systematic reviews

Objectives

In a series of important scholarly works, Joan McCord made the case for the criminological community to take seriously harmful effects arising from individual-based crime prevention programs. Building on these works, two key questions are of central interest to this paper: What has been the state of research on harmful effects of these crime prevention programs since McCord’s works? And what are the theoretical, methodological, and programmatic characteristics of individual-based crime prevention programs with reported harmful effects?

Methods

This paper reports on the first empirical review of harmful effects of crime prevention programs, drawing upon 15 Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews. Altogether, 574 experimental and quasi-experimental studies (published and unpublished) with 645 independent effect sizes were reviewed.

Results

A total of 22 harmful effects from 22 unique studies of individual-based crime prevention programs were identified. Almost all of the studies have been reported since 1990, all but 2 were carried out in the United States, and two-thirds can be considered unpublished. The studies covered a wide range of interventions, from anti-bullying programs at schools, to second responder interventions involving police, to the Scared Straight program for juvenile delinquents, with more than half taking place in criminal justice settings. Boot camps and drug courts accounted for the largest share of studies with harmful effects.

Conclusions

Theory failure, implementation failure, and deviancy training were identified as the leading explanations for harmful effects of crime prevention programs, and they served as key anchors for a more focused look at implications for theory and policy. Also, the need for programs to be rigorously evaluated and monitored is evident, which will advance McCord’s call for attention to safety and efficacy.     

Corruption and hold-up: the role of intermediaries

Corrupt contracts are illegal and, therefore, vulnerable to hold-up. That is, a bureaucrat who has accepted a bribe from a firm in exchange for a license may still choose not to grant the firm that license (hold-up). This paper develops a model to study the role that intermediaries play in preventing hold-up. There are two types of firms, good firms that are legally entitled to receive a license, and harmful firms that are not. Without intermediaries only good firms enter the market, and harmful firms do not enter because of hold-up. Intermediaries are legally permitted to help firms reduce their navigation costs of obtaining licenses. Thus, intermediaries increase entry of good firms. However, by utilizing the legal aspects of their transaction with good firms as leverage against the bureaucrat, intermediaries can prevent hold-up among harmful firms. Thus, intermediaries increase participation by both good and harmful firms and their welfare costs are ambiguous. Data obtained from occurrences of violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act are broadly consistent with our model.     

刑事归责的时间之维——论危害结果延迟发生案件的司法处理

在处理危害结果延迟发生的案件时,若已经存在对行为人就同一犯罪行为的有效刑事裁判,则即便之后又发生了危害结果或加重结果,也不应再据此追究或加重行为人的刑事责任。观念论的时间观所揭示的人的认知规律和刑事不法的本质,共同决定了经过较长时间才延迟发生的危害结果不能再被归责于早已实行终了的实行行为。这种刑事归责的时间之维是在考虑过往的实行行为对于在现时社会中确证规范效力、保护法益之意义的基础上,从功能主义与目的理性的角度建构刑事不法的结果,其与刑事追诉时效制度存在紧密的内在关联,故在个案中应当类推适用追诉期限判断实行行为与危害结果之间的时间间隔是否已经足以阻却归责。     

浅谈刑法有无明文规定的判断标准--兼论刑法没有规定为单位犯罪的单位危害行为的处理

一个危害行为在刑法中有无明文规定的判断标准是什么,这是罪刑法定原则司法化的核心问题之一.实践中,应以有无完全相符合的犯罪构成,作为某一危害行为在刑法中有无明文规定的判断标准.     

疫病非疫区的划分和承认对国际贸易的影响

疫病非疫区的划分和承认直接关系到食品安全、人类及动植物之生命和健康,其意义和作用日益明显。世贸组织《实施卫生与动植物卫生检疫措施协定》(SPS协定)以及国际动物卫生组织(OIE)和国际植物保护公约(IPPC)对此都有相应的规定。疫病非疫区的划分和承认是一种用于控制动植物疫病的有效手段,在疫病的防控方面具有重要作用,它有利于疫病控制和疫情扑灭,可以打破国外以疫情为借口设置的技术壁垒,从而促进动植物产品的出口,保证国际贸易安全。我国应加强与相关国际组织的联系,积极研究我国主要农产品进出口成员之卫生和植物卫生状况和适当保护水平,在此基础上完善对疫病非疫区的建设,促进对外贸易的发展。     

刑法解释方法与人权保障的实现——从类推解释、扩张解释、限制解释谈起

无论是刑法类推解释、扩张解释还是限制解释,都不是在刑法规定的字面意义上所进行的解释,不能保障国民的预测可能性,因而均应当区分为有利于行为人的类推解释、扩张解释、限制解释和不利于行为人的类推解释、扩张解释、限制解释。前者有利于人权保障,应当允许;而后者不利于人权保障,应当禁止。     

严格责任还是特别辩护权?——对我国事态犯罪归责方式的反思

事态犯罪是一种新型犯罪。该类犯罪使刑法首次将调整对象由传统的行为性危害行为括及于事态性危害行为,因此对犯罪证明责任这一刑法基本理论问题产生了重大冲击。严格责任是解决相关问题的最简便方法,但与我国的刑事法制环境不相适合。因此,为了实现控辩双方权益的平衡,应当设立事态犯罪嫌疑人特别辩护权制度。     

再论环境侵权责任的“原罪”说

一般侵权行为成立的前提是行为的正当性,而特殊侵权行为的特殊性在于特殊行为的潜在风险性。环境侵权行为也具有潜在风险性,但其更本质的特点是改变环境或给环境带来不利影响。这种行为从一开始就注定不可避免地而不是潜在地给环境造成不利影响,这是其"原罪"之所在。让环境侵权行为人承担责任不是基于过错或其他什么理由,而是以环境侵权行为的原罪为根据。     

论管制规范在侵权行为法上的意义

一个加害行为违反或者没有违反相关管制规范的事实,对于侵权行为的判定会产生什么样的影响?从公法与私法相互关系的视角来思考可以深化对此问题的理解。管制规范中的防止侵害型规范,是以保护他人利益为目的,对侵权行为法具有直接意义。在侵权行为法的适用过程中,此种类型的管制规范作为私法规范的一种补充,其评判与裁判功能将有机会得以显现,并主要体现在侵权裁判的论证负担上。     

“三鹿奶粉”系列案定性探疑

"三鹿奶粉"系列案涉及的、含有三聚氰胺的所谓"蛋白粉"是有害物质而不是有毒物质,添加者故意将其添加到原牛奶中并卖给"三鹿集团"的行为,在性质上属于生产、销售有害食品。制造并销售"蛋白粉"的行为不应当如法院判决的那样构成以危险方法危害公共安全罪,而应当与添加者的行为构成生产、销售有害食品罪的"连锁共犯"。"三鹿集团"的行为,应当以2008年8月1日检测报告出具明确结论为界分为两个阶段:在前一阶段,其直接负责的主管人员构成重大责任事故罪,在后一阶段,"三鹿集团"的行为在性质上属于生产、销售有害食品,与生产销售伪劣产品罪存在法条竞合;根据《刑法》第149条关于择一重罪处罚的规定,应按第140条的规定构成生产、销售伪劣产品罪;对"三鹿集团"直接负责的主管人员两个阶段的罪行应当数罪并罚。     

The Preference for Indirect Harm

We presented subjects pairs of hypothetical scenarios. The action in each scenario harmed some people in order to aid others. In one member of the pair, the harm was a direct result of the action. In the other member, it was an indirect byproduct. Subjects preferred the indirect harm to the direct harm. This result could not be fully explained in terms of differences in judgments about which option was more active, more intentional, more likely to cause harm, or more subject to the disapproval of others. Taken together, these findings provide evidence for a new bias in judgment, a tendency to favor indirectly harmful options over directly harmful alternatives, irrespective of the associated outcomes, intentions, or self-presentational concerns. We speculate that this bias could originate from the use of a typical but somewhat unreliable property of harmful acts, their directness, as a cue to moral evaluation. We discuss the implications of the bias for a range of social issues, including the distinction between passive and active euthanasia, legal deterrence, and the rhetoric of affirmative action.     

试论忘却犯的行为性

忘却犯是指负有防止危害结果发生义务的人因为疏忽大意的过失而未尽职责致使该结果发生从而构成的不纯正不作为犯。忘却犯是历来确定行为概念时不得不面临而又最难逾越的障碍。只有将行为定义为“体现了主体的心理事实、能对社会生活产生重大影响的身体动静”方可正确地说明“犯罪是行为”这一命题。     

Introduction of Mandatory Vehicle Inspection and Its Impact on Health: Case of Georgia

Abstract

To fight atmospheric air pollution, the Georgian government has implemented a law about vehicle inspection. The aim of this survey is to determine under which conditions are owners of technically faulty vehicles ready to give up using technically faulty cars. Within the qualitative study the in-depth interviews were conducted. Taxi drivers think that this law is harmful to them though they appreciate the efficacy of vehicle inspections. Controls should be placed on the quality of fuel as part of the development of public transport while increasing awareness about the harmful effects of atmospheric air pollution.     

State crimes and state harms: a tale of two definitional frameworks

Criminologists have long debated the issue of how to define crime, and hence, the scope of criminological inquiry. For years, some critical criminologists have argued for expanded definitions of crime that include harmful behaviors of the state that may not be officially defined as criminal. Other critical criminologists have argued that existing legal frameworks may be used to study varieties of state crime, and that defining the harmful actions of the state as criminal is important to help mobilize public support for their control. In this paper, we first trace the historical development of these two perspectives, and then offer a tentative solution to the seeming tension between these two perspectives.     

Criminalizing Ecological Harm: Crimes Against Carrying Capacity and the Criminalization of Eco-Sinners

This article examines how a broader class of environmentally harmful behavior can be examined from a criminological frame of reference. By using examples of soil degradation and anthropogenic climate change, it is argued that environmentally damaging behavior is similar to many other types of crime. Particularly when taken from the standpoint that environmentally harmful behavior is ultimately detrimental to human social organizations by undermining ‘carrying capacity’, outright criminalization might strike many as a valid option. Nonetheless, there are also some fundamental differences that will ultimately prevent a strict legalistic perspective from being successful in minimizing ecological harm. Instead, this article argues that criminologists need to emphasize the importance of shaming and status rewards in pursuing a greener future.     

Sex Trafficking and Moral Harm: Politicised Understandings and Depictions of the Trafficked Experience

This paper explores notions of harm in sex work discourse, highlighting the extent to which essentialist ideas of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’ sex have pervaded trafficking policy. In a comparative examination of Australian Parliamentary Inquiries and United States congressional hearings leading to the establishment of anti-trafficking policy, we identify the stories that have influenced legislators, and established a narrative of trafficking heavily dependent upon assumptions of the inherent harm of sex work. This narrative constructs a hierarchy of victimisation, which denies alternative discourses of why women migrate for sex work. We argue that it is not sexual commerce that is harmful, but pathological, systemic inequalities and entrenched disadvantage that are harmful. A narrow narrative of trafficking fails to adequately depict this complexity of the trafficked experience.     

The Limits of the Harm Principle

The harm principle, understood as the normative requirement that conduct should be criminalized only if it is harmful, has difficulty in dealing with those core cases of criminal wrongdoing that can occur without causing any direct harm. Advocates of the harm principle typically find it implausible to hold that these core cases should not be crimes and so usually seek out some indirect harm that can justify criminalizing the seemingly harmless conduct. But this strategy justifies criminalization of a wide range of conduct on the basis of the fear, worry, and anxiety it generates among those who are not the direct victims of the conduct, and thereby undermines the limiting role of the harm principle by permitting the very move it was meant to prevent: the criminalization of harmless conduct on the ground of others’ feelings about it. The best way to avoid this dilemma is to recognize that people have rights, operating independently of the harm principle, to be treated in certain ways just because they are persons. The existence of such rights provides a ground for both criminalizing conduct and limiting the scope of criminalization because these rights point both to conduct that people must be permitted to engage in (regardless of its harmful effects) and conduct that might well be criminalized (though it is not harmful). A complete account of criminal law will therefore require the harm principle to work together with an independent account of rights.